 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Adams v. Land Servs., Court of Appeals No. 07CA0848,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FIVE, July 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment in favor of defendants was affirmed because the minority group of general partners lacked standing to file suit on behalf of the general partnership, when there was no indication in the record that a group of partners owning a majority of the interests in the partnership authorized the action.
|
|||||
| Bankr. Estate of Morris v. COPIC Ins. Co., Court of Appeals Nos. 06CA2588 & 07CA0305,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, July 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred by granting insurance company summary judgment on bad faith claim because there were disputed issues of material fact as to whether insurance company and attorneys retained to defend underlying case properly advised doctor as to risks of trial, risks of an excess verdict, and the right to retain personal counsel.
|
|||||
| Berger v. City of Boulder, Court of Appeals No. 07CA0410,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, July 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment declaring invalid the city's conditional approval of the use review was affirmed because the condition that the business not sell alcohol after 11 p.m. constituted an impermissible attempt to regulate the sale of alcoholic beverages.
|
|||||
| Betterview Invs., LLC v. Public Serv. Co., Court of Appeals No. 07CA1224,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION SIX, July 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A development company had standing to pursue trespass and inverse condemnation claims against a public utility company that maintained a gas pipeline on its property even though it did not own the property when the utility company first failed to remove the pipelines because they constituted a continuing trespass.
|
|||||
| Cork v. Sentry Ins., Court of Appeals No. 07CA0967,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION SIX, July 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting summary judgment for defendants on the claim of bad faith breach of insurance contract, because there were genuine issues of material fact that the settlement and unexplained failure to pay remaining UIM benefits established the date on which both the injury and its cause were known or should have been known.
|
|||||
| Dinosaur Park Invs., L.L.C. v. Tello, Court of Appeals No. 07CA0956,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION THREE, July 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment in favor of the buyer on the seller's breach of contract claim was reversed and remanded because the buyer's claim to void the contract pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. ¿ 38-35-126 (2007) was in the nature of an affirmative defense and compulsory counterclaim, subject to any bar for failing to timely assert it in the action.
|
|||||
| Hellas Constr., Inc. v. Rio Blanco County, Court of Appeals No. 07CA1114,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION FOUR, July 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: County's determination that a taxpayer violated Colo. Rev. Stat. ¿ 42-3-107(17)(e)(II) and imposing penalties was a quasi-judicial action, and the county abused its discretion in making its determination because there was no evidence that the taxpayer owned or operated the machinery in question as required for imposition of the penalties.
|
|||||
| In re C.A.O., Court of Appeals No. 07CA1033,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, July 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Case was remanded to the trial court because the trial court concluded it had no authority to appoint counsel in a stepparent adoption proceeding without specifically considering the C. S. court decision or applying the Lassiter factors to determine whether the presumption that due process did not require counsel was overcome.
|
|||||
| Luster v. Brinkman, Court of Appeals No. 06CA2443,
COURT OF APPEALS OF COLORADO, DIVISION TWO, July 10, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Doctor who was board certified in obstetrics and gynecology and maternal-fetal medicine, who co-authorized a publication on shoulder dystocia, and who practiced for more than 20 years and delivered more than 1,000 babies was qualified as an expert under Colo. R. Evid. 703 in a medical malpractice case stemming from a shoulder dystocia delivery.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
